|John in Ma|
|March 20 2017, 9:40 AM |
|March 20 2017, 1:19 PM |
Give the Hunter guys a card with the yardages on it.
|March 20 2017, 2:19 PM |
I wasn't sure if the OPs intention was to solicit how to even out Hunter PCP vs Hunter Piston, or to bring parity to Hunter vs other Divisions. PCP has some inherent advantages over Piston, so we would need to handicap the PCP in some way in order to achieve that first goal.
Back to K (Knobs):
10) might help scores and make it less work for the Hunter shooter, but it does not encourage development of ranging skills.
Most all "Hunter" field target shooters us mil-dot scopes, or some other stadiametric reticle. Those reticles are designed specifically to range known targets. Give the the shooter something that they can use to practice their reticle range finding. Some standard sized features or maybe a cheat sheet with some target sizes.
In many cases, those "in charge" do NOT want the Hunter shooters using the scopes as intended, or they just want to keep the Hunter scores lower than the Open shooters. If that's happening, you will not have scoring parity with other Divisions unless we allow the same equipment.
What I have been doing at our matches: I do not go to extra efforts to cover targets or bases (at least most targets
). We use only 7 different face plates, with the majority being the ubiquitous squirrel target. The Hunter shooter can learn to apply stadiametric methods and get some semblance of parity for accurately ranging targets when compared to higher power scopes. I encourage it and have even done presentations at past matches on how to utilize that method of range finding. But I also tell shooters not to rely on that method, and that focus range finding can work for close targets when needed (and farther targets if they have a high power scope).
You may see matches where extra efforts have been made to hide targets/features, and the bucket-sitters/bipod-users are not allowed to use high power scopes (no freestyle). Those match directors do not want the Hunter shooters to have parity, so accept it and it's OK.
|This message has been edited by Scotchmo1957 on Mar 20, 2017 2:21 PM|
I still think it's a good idea
|March 20 2017, 2:29 PM |
You are right, but there's no law that says you have to use the card. It'll help new guys learn the game too.
My bet is that if we hand out the cards, there aren't going to be any massive score increases, but there will be a lot of head scrathcing as guys who cuss their 12 power scopes realize they're still missing shots.
I'm not sure handing out cards would raise Open or FTF scores either. I get my butt kicked by the wind.
It discourages skill development.
|March 20 2017, 2:52 PM |
There are plenty of target shooting formats that already give the distance to the targets. Field target (and a few other shooting sports) encourage range finding techniques. I think that any valid range finding technique should be encouraged. That includes reticle range finding and laser range finders.
Rather than simply giving them the distances, let them use/develop the skills normally used in the field.
Range finding is a "Hunter" skill. Focus range finding might be suitable for our short range airgunning, but it IS NOT a common method used with firearms. Let them use common range finding methods, and encourage it.
IF not distance then....
|March 20 2017, 3:24 PM |
how about a card that gives the KZ size?
Then its much easier to range using the reticule, cuz you have known size to use in your ranging calculations..... Takes some of the "guesswork " out of finding something on the target to base your math on, but still requires some skill to do so.
Re: IF not distance then....
|March 20 2017, 6:14 PM |
KZ's can be used. I'll be switching most of our KZs so that we are using 15mm, 25mm, and 40mm. I still may retain a few other sizes (just to keep it interesting
). The 15mm, 25mm, and 40mm are easy to tell apart so no need to relay additional info to shooters. Kill zone sizes are fairly small, so you are still stuck with +/- 5yrds on the far targets. Some experts that bracket exceptionally well (better than I can do) might get +/- 2yrds on the same KZ.
Another option would be to use WFTF regulation signage. That gives a larger reference to use. The WFTF rules require 10cm high numbers for targets. The sign size is 15cm x 24cm. They are placed in proximity of the associated target.
None of that is required
in AAFTA matches, but no rule changes needed if you want to run a match that way.
|This message has been edited by Scotchmo1957 on Mar 20, 2017 9:20 PM|
I Like that idea.... nt
|March 20 2017, 7:41 PM |
|March 20 2017, 2:43 PM |
I vote we scrap the US rules and adopt and follow the WFTF rules ... like the rest of the world does.
To level the FT game in the USA by using sub 12ft lb airguns for competition - then we only have 2 classes - PCP and Springer.
And for HFT the there are well established rules as well for that game UKHFT
Otherwise there is NO level playing field and there never will be.
Just my .2c worth ... don't hate me for it .. I shoot WFTF Springer as it is - usually in my class of me myself and I.
James, if you shoot WFTF Springer .................
|March 20 2017, 3:01 PM |
Are you not playing by World rules now? Seemingly thinking you are from across the pond ... could you possibly be a little bias? Just kidding but you have been advocating that point for sometime. The Hunter class over here evolves a lot around the bucket and bipod. Take those away and we would probably lose a fair number of Hunter shooters. (jmo)
Level playing field...
|March 20 2017, 6:51 PM |
To me, a level playing implies everyone shooting with the same equipment & rules, which in turn implies shooting in the same class.
Having diversity provides opportunity and inclusiveness, which is a good argument for having multiple classes: different equipment, different rules... with a level playing field within each class.
|This message has been edited by HookEm on Mar 20, 2017 6:55 PM|
|March 21 2017, 7:42 AM |
|Louis Bigelow |
Number 7 is kinda useless. Nt
|March 20 2017, 8:02 PM |
I shoot in the hunter class with both PCP and piston depending on how my interest is for that match. If the hunter class or stools go away then you will lose me as a member/shooter since my health does not allow me to get up and down from the ground easy enough to shoot an entire match in open or WFTF. If you don't think the game is fair in the class you shoot you are free to shoot in a different class to suit your needs/fancy. I do not agree with the hunter class going first because it has been said we can cheat by seeing the big scopes side wheels to have an advantage in the range to the target. First it assumes the person you are reading the yardage from has ranged the distance correctly their self, and if not then you are no better off than before. If they do range find correctly and you see the distance you still have to sight the target correctly for the holds your gun requires to hit the kill zone. Speaking for myself being able to see the range a WFTF or open shooter ranges with their big scope does not give me enough of an advantage to be a threat or get even close to out shooting them or any other hunter class shooter for that matter.
I have only been shooting in hunter class for about three years with the MCAFT club so I am learning every match but if the stools and sticks go away then so do I and I believe it will be a lot more as well. Its supposed to be a fun sport/hobby and all this trying to level the playing field is not good for the sport and is why there are different classes so it attracts people from all levels of discipline and means to enjoy the camaraderie and share in the experience of all that attend. Our club and its members share and help each other in every aspect of the sport so that all have a good time and are able to become better shooters as a result. Its the attitude of my fellow club members that has kept me coming back each month to shoot and learn from the long time shooters that gladly share their knowledge with all that want to learn.
How to improve hunter class performance
|March 20 2017, 11:22 PM |
I believe your question was "what do you think would be a simple, easy change that would improve hunter class performance (both PCP and Piston} against Open and WFTF classes. If I misinterpreted feel free to correct me.
As far as I am concerned, if I could make one change to help level the playing field it would be #1 but realistically the best solution would be #2 as it would eliminate the need to buy another piece of equipment. I would even concede to limiting scope power to 24x for hunter class. At 24x you would at least have a fighting chance to range out to 55 yards. There is little difference in the cost of buying a 3-12 power scope versus 6-24 power scope from a specific manufacturer so the argument that it would be too expensive for Hunter shooters is really mute.
There are many factors that limit the potential of hunter class shooters, but the most critical is range finding. It is universally agreed that ranging beyond 40-45 yds at 12x no matter what the quality of the scope is at best a crap shoot. Now think about what rule change went into effect in 2016 for Grand Prix and National matches:
"F. At least one third of the targets per course must be set beyond 40 yards. And targets beyond 45 yards must have full-size KZ's (1.5+")"
Does any HFT shooter think that a 20yd 1/2 inch KZ is the same difficulty as a 40yd 1 inch KZ? Scott Hull has pioneered the use of using mil-dots to range find in the HFT class. Scott's long list of wins in GP and national championships highlight the success of this technique (and the incredible shooter that Scott is). I have long believed that this technique is only practical if shooting from the prone position (which Scott also mastered in HFT before moving on to WFTF) because of the stability of the position. A 10% error in calculating the mil-dot size of a target at 50 yards results in a 5 yard error in distance calculation, about the same, if not worse, than parallax range finding at 12x. Many point to this technique as the answer for for the HFT whiners, my thought is that if it was that good why aren't the Open Class shooters using the technique? Scott will also be the first to tell you that using this technique on a course you have never shot before, on a timer is a real challenge.
Just my thoughts, in a perfect world there would be separate courses for each class, where the top shooters in the country would shoot 98% and everyone could judge where they stood in their class with some clarity.
Jim in Sacramento
PS: The elephant in the room is clicking!!!
|This message has been edited by 22Jim on Mar 20, 2017 11:28 PM|
Jim, I like and agree with everything you said ....
|March 21 2017, 12:06 AM |
but I was only referring to Hunter PCP shooters shooting against each other and so forth with the Hunter springers. With the extra equipment available to Open shooters it will always be much more difficult for Hunter shooters to stay with them. Not that a fluke can't happen but I think it will always be rather rare. As mentioned the distance to the target is always the biggest obstacle for me but I guess that's the way it is. Shooting Jackets greatly enhance ones ability to shoot offhand well and many times the ones who shoot well standing have a big advantage to be class winners. I agree with Mr. Hull that bracketing can be beneficial if you have a predictable location to bracket. You're absolutely right that the prone position can be the most stable position to bracket from or shoot from. Seems since the attached bipods were eliminated the hunter prone shooters have somewhat declined.
Nice to see some activity on this thread :>) it's been a rather long winter.
Good post Jim...
|March 21 2017, 2:41 AM |
I might agree with #1. We allow laser range finders at all of our Morro Bay matches, except this year's AAFTA GP points match. It is another piece of equipment. But many "Hunters" already have a laser range finder. And they are cheaper than a high power scope. Allowing only
#2 would require them to buy a higher power scope (more $$$). I use Leapers scopes. A side focus 24x costs about 2x as much as a side focus 12x. They do have cheaper 24x scopes, but only front focus. I got rid of all my higher power scopes. If I shoot Open or WFTF again, it will be with a 12x or 16x scope.
When referring to bracketing, you said:
"I have long believed that this technique is only practical if shooting from the prone position..."
That seems to be a common, though unfounded belief (myth?) among FT shooters. That is where I will disagree with you. A stable prone position can help your stability for shooting as well as bracketing, but practical bracketing does not require a prone position. My first two years of field target, I used a bucket/sticks. And my primary range finding method was by bracketing, same as when I shot prone, same as now when I sit on the ground. I have not shot prone FT for two or three years and I still use bracketing in most every match, when a viable feature present itself. The most important requirements for bracketing are a good/familiar reticle, a known feature of sufficient size, and a good read of the dots. If the feature is small, you WILL need a more stable hold AND more magnification for a good range estimate. In general, if you are stable enough to make a 50 yard shot, you are stable enough to read the mil-dots. At 50 yards, a KZ spans about one dot space. I can read to 1/10 dot. That's .15" on a 12x scope. With a 1.5" KZ as the feature, that's .15"/1.5" = 10%. As you said, a 10% error, or 5 yards. Barely adequate even for a reliable 20fpe shot. And inadequate for a 12fpe. However, if the feature is 6", or even better 8", you get .15"/8". So only about 2% error or 1 yard. Now you've got a chance. That all depends on a well calibrated scope, a viable feature, and a good dot read. It's easy to do, just not all that easy to do it consistently/accurately. It's takes practice to get good at it. Even when everything is present, I still get it wrong sometimes.
Check this out:
What if our National match required target signage according to WFTF world match rules? That would give Hunter shooters a reason to learn bracketing. It would not require $$$ expense from the shooters. WFTF shooters would probably appreciate it.
Instead of seeing something like that, I have been to a few matches where it looks like extra effort was spent in an attempt to hide target features. That can make bracketing more difficult. That tells me where they are coming from. Doing that has little affect on Open or WFTF shooters as those shooters have access to their "optical range finders" (i.e., big scopes). I have to assume that they don't want Hunter shooters, or lower cost equipment, to be able to range effectively when compared to the "Top" shooters in Open Division.
|Louis Bigelow |
|March 21 2017, 12:29 AM |
you won't level pcp's and springers. it's the nature of the beast. larry's and my LGU's do a good job though. his heavily tuned and mine stock. I will be back shooting hunter once my eye issue gets cleared up.
|This message has been edited by LouisBigelow on Mar 21, 2017 12:30 AM|